Adjuvant platinum versus capecitabine for residual, invasive, triple-negative breast cancer: Patient-reported outcomes in ECOG-ACRIN EA1131.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are a better tool for evaluating the experiences of patients who have symptomatic, treatment-associated adverse events (AEs) compared with clinician-rated AEs. The authors present PROs assessing health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and treatment-related neurotoxicity for adjuvant capecitabine versus platinum on the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-American College of Radiology Imaging Network (ECOG-ACRIN) EA1131 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02445391). METHODS: Participants completed the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast Cancer Symptom Index (NFBSI-16) and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Gynecologic Oncology Group neurotoxicity subscale (platinum arm only) at baseline, cycle 3 day 1 (C3D1), 6 months, and 15 months. Because of early termination, power was insufficient to test the hypothesis that HRQoL, as assessed by the NFBSI-16 treatment side-effect (TSE) subscale, would be better at 6 and 15 months in the capecitabine arm; all analyses were exploratory. Means were compared by using t-tests or the Wilcoxon rank-sum test, and proportions were compared by using the χ2 test. RESULTS: Two hundred ninety-six of 330 eligible patients provided PROs. The mean NFBSI-16 TSE subscale score was lower for the platinum arm at baseline (p = .02; absolute difference, 0.6 points) and for the capecitabine arm at C3D1 (p = .04; absolute difference, 0.5 points), but it did not differ at other times. The mean change in TSE subscale scores differed between the arms from baseline to C3D1 (platinum arm, 0.15; capecitabine arm, -0.72; p = .03), but not from baseline to later time points. The mean decline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Gynecologic Oncology Group neurotoxicity subscale scores exceeded the minimal meaningful change (1.38 points) from baseline to each subsequent time point (all p < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the similar frequency of clinician-rated AEs, PROs identified greater on-treatment symptom burden with capecitabine and complemented clinician-rated AEs by characterizing patients' experiences during chemotherapy.

Racial disparities in outcomes of patients with stage I-III triple-negative breast cancer after adjuvant chemotherapy: a post-hoc analysis of the E5103 randomized trial.

PURPOSE: Breast cancer mortality is higher in Black women than other racial groups. This difference has been partially attributed to a higher proportion of triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). However, it is uncertain if survival disparities exist in racially diverse TNBC patients receiving similar treatments. Here, we examine racial differences in disease-related outcomes in TNBC patients treated on the E5103 clinical trial. METHODS: From 2007 to 2011, 4,994 patients with stage I-III HER2-negative breast cancer were randomized to adjuvant chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab. This analysis was limited to the subset of 1,742 TNBC patients with known self-reported race. Unadjusted Kaplan-Meier curves and adjusted Cox-Proportional Hazards models were used to determine breast cancer events and survival outcomes. RESULTS: Of the analysis population, 51 (2.9%) were Asian, 269 (15.4%) Black, and 1422 (81.6%) White. Median age was 51 years. Patient characteristics, treatment arm, and local therapies were similar across racial groups. White women were more commonly node-negative (56% vs. 49% and 44% in Asian and Black women, respectively; p < 0.01). At a median follow-up of 46 months, unadjusted Kaplan-Meier locoregional and distant recurrence, and disease-free and overall survival, did not differ significantly by race. In Cox models adjusted for patient and tumor characteristics and treatment arm, race was not associated with any disease event. Larger tumor size and nodal involvement were consistently associated with breast cancer events. CONCLUSION: This clinical trial population of similarly treated TNBC patients showed no racial differences in breast cancer outcomes. Disease extent, rather than race, was associated with disease events.

A randomized phase II study of metronomic cyclophosphamide and methotrexate (CM) with or without bevacizumab in patients with advanced breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Metronomic chemotherapy has the potential to offer tumor control with reduced toxicity when compared to standard dose chemotherapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer. As metronomic chemotherapy may target the tumor microvasculature, it has the potential for synergistic effects with antiangiogenic agents such as the VEGF-A inhibitor bevacizumab. METHODS: In this randomized phase II study, patients with metastatic breast cancer were randomized to receive metronomic oral cyclophosphamide and methotrexate (CM) combined with bevacizumab (Arm A) or CM alone (Arm B). The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety and tolerability. RESULTS: A total of 55 patients were enrolled, with 34 patients treated on Arm A and 21 patients treated on Arm B. The ORR was modestly higher in Arm A (26%) than in Arm B (10%); neither met the 40% cutoff for further clinical evaluation. The median time to progression (TTP) was 5.52 months (3.22-13.6) on Arm A and 1.82 months (1.54-6.70) on Arm B (log-rank p = 0.008). The median OS was 29.6 months (17.2-NA) on Arm A and 16.2 months (15.7-NA) on Arm B (log-rank p = 0.7). Common all-grade adverse events in both arms included nausea, fatigue, and elevated AST. CONCLUSION: The combination of metronomic CM with bevacizumab significantly improved PFS over CM alone, although there was no significant difference in OS. Oral metronomic chemotherapy alone has limited activity in advanced breast cancer. CLINICALTRIALS: gov Identifier: NCT00083031. Date of Registration: May 17, 2004.

Identifying homologous recombination deficiency in breast cancer: genomic instability score distributions differ among breast cancer subtypes.

PURPOSE: A 3-biomarker homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) score is a key component of a currently FDA-approved companion diagnostic assay to identify HRD in patients with ovarian cancer using a threshold score of ≥ 42, though recent studies have explored the utility of a lower threshold (GIS ≥ 33). The present study evaluated whether the ovarian cancer thresholds may also be appropriate for major breast cancer subtypes by comparing the genomic instability score (GIS) distributions of BRCA1/2-deficient estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer (ER + BC) and triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) to the GIS distribution of BRCA1/2-deficient ovarian cancer. METHODS: Ovarian cancer and breast cancer (ER + BC and TNBC) tumors from ten study cohorts were sequenced to identify pathogenic BRCA1/2 mutations, and GIS was calculated using a previously described algorithm. Pathologic complete response (pCR) to platinum therapy was evaluated in a subset of TNBC samples. For TNBC, a threshold was set and threshold validity was assessed relative to clinical outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 560 ovarian cancer, 805 ER + BC, and 443 TNBC tumors were included. Compared to ovarian cancer, the GIS distribution of BRCA1/2-deficient samples was shifted lower for ER + BC (p = 0.015), but not TNBC (p = 0.35). In the subset of TNBC samples, univariable logistic regression models revealed that GIS status using thresholds of ≥ 42 and ≥ 33 were significant predictors of response to platinum therapy. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that the GIS thresholds used for ovarian cancer may also be appropriate for TNBC, but not ER + BC. GIS thresholds in TNBC were validated using clinical response data to platinum therapy.

Racial Disparities in Locoregional Recurrence in Postmenopausal Patients with Stage I-III, Hormone Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer Enrolled in the NSABP B-42 Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: There are limited data examining racial disparities in locoregional recurrence (LRR) among women with access to high-quality care. We aimed to examine differences in late LRR by race in patients with stage I-IIIA, hormone receptor-positive (HR+) breast cancer enrolled in the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel (NSABP) B-42 trial. METHODS: From 2006 to 2010, 3966 postmenopausal women with stage I-IIIA HR+ breast cancer who were disease-free after 5 years of endocrine therapy were randomized to an additional 5 years of endocrine therapy or placebo. Patients were excluded if multi-racial or if race was unknown. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to estimate 6-year LRR from the time of trial registration and according to race. Cox proportional hazards models were used for adjusted survival analyses. RESULTS: Overall, 3929 NSABP B-42 patients were included: 3688 (93.9%) White, 151 (3.8%) Black, and 90 (2.3%) Asian patients. Median follow-up was 75.2 months. Overall estimated 6-year LRR from trial registration was 1.8% and differed by race: LRR rates were 1.7% in White women, 4.9% in Black women, and 0% in Asian women (p = 0.046). Adjusted Cox proportional hazards analysis found Black race to be independently associated with LRR (hazard ratio [HzR] 2.36, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-5.49; p = 0.047). Node-positivity was also associated with increased LRR (HzR 1.75, 95% CI 1.07-2.86; p = 0.025). Adjusted Cox analysis found LRR (HzR 2.32, 95% CI 1.33-4.06; p = 0.003) to be associated with increased overall mortality; however, race was not independently associated with mortality. CONCLUSION: Among postmenopausal patients with stage I-IIIA HR+ breast cancer in the NSABP B-42 trial, racial differences in late LRR were present, with the highest LRR in Black women.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Outcomes After Breast-Conserving Therapy and Endocrine Therapy for DCIS: A Post-Hoc Analysis of the NSABP B-35 Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Racial and ethnic disparities in outcomes after treatment for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) are largely unknown. The objective of this study was to examine breast cancer outcomes by race and ethnicity in the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) B-35 clinical trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The NSABP B-35 trial randomized postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive DCIS treated with breast-conserving therapy to 5 years of tamoxifen or anastrozole. In total, 3104 women were enrolled between 2003 and 2006. For this analysis, patients without complete self-reported race and ethnicity or with immediate trial dropout were excluded. Kaplan-Meier curves and adjusted Cox-proportional hazards models were used for analyses. RESULTS: Of the 3061 women included, 2614 (85.4%) were non-Hispanic white (NHW), 255 (8.3%) were non-Hispanic Black (NHB), 95 (3.1%) were Hispanic, and 96 (3.1%) were Asian or Pacific Islander (API). Endocrine therapy assignment and duration were well balanced between racial and ethnic groups. Median follow-up was 9 years; unadjusted Kaplan-Meier curves did not show any racial differences in disease events. Adjusted Cox-proportional hazards models found API (versus NHW) race to be associated with higher local recurrence [hazard ratio (HzR) 2.45, p = 0.035] and NHB race to be associated with higher distant recurrence (HzR 5.03, p = 0.020) and breast cancer mortality (HzR 3.83, p = 0.046). CONCLUSIONS: Despite similar locoregional treatments and standard endocrine therapy in a clinical trial population, racial and ethnic disparities exist in long-term outcomes for hormone-receptor-positive DCIS. These findings suggest that factors outside of access and treatment may impact DCIS outcomes by race and ethnicity.

New Developments in Systemic Management for High-Risk Early-Stage Hormone-Receptor-Positive, HER2-Negative Breast Cancer.

OPINION STATEMENT: For high-risk early-stage hormone-receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer (HR + /HER2 - EBC), short- and long-term recurrence risks remain substantial despite local control with surgery and radiation and systemic treatment with chemotherapy and endocrine therapy (ET). Recent trials have provided new strategies for reducing recurrence. The monarchE trial demonstrated that adding 2 years of adjuvant abemaciclib to ET improves invasive disease-free survival (iDFS) and distant recurrence-free survival (DRFS). In the OlympiA trial for high-risk disease in patients with germline BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations, adding 1 year of olaparib to ET improved iDFS, DRFS, and overall survival (OS). In addition, for premenopausal women with high-risk tumors, long-term follow-up of the SOFT, ASTRRA, TEXT, ABCSG-12, and HOBOE trials supports the role of ovarian function suppression (OFS), in combination with adjuvant tamoxifen or aromatase inhibition (AI). For postmenopausal women with high-risk tumors, extended-duration AI for at least 7 years should be used with zoledronic acid. Given the remaining recurrence risk even with these interventions and with the ongoing development of new strategies for HR + disease, patients with high-risk EBC should be encouraged to participate in clinical trials, such as trials of immunotherapy, novel oral estrogen receptor alpha (ERα)-targeting agents, antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs), and trials guided by measurements of minimal residual disease (MRD).

Design of SERENA-6, a phase III switching trial of camizestrant in ESR1-mutant breast cancer during first-line treatment.

ESR1 mutation (ESR1m) is a frequent cause of acquired resistance to aromatase inhibitor (AI) plus cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i), which is a first-line therapy for hormone-receptor-positive (HR+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer (ABC). Camizestrant is a next-generation oral selective estrogen receptor degrader (SERD) that in a phase II study significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) over fulvestrant (also a SERD) in ER+/HER2- ABC. SERENA-6 (NCT04964934) is a randomized, double-blind, phase III study evaluating the efficacy and safety of switching from an AI to camizestrant, while maintaining the same CDK4/6i, upon detection of ESR1m in circulating tumor DNA before clinical disease progression on first-line therapy for HR+/HER2- ABC. The aim is to treat ESR1m clones and extend the duration of control of ER-driven tumor growth, delaying the need for chemotherapy. The primary end point is PFS; secondary end points include chemotherapy-free survival, time to second progression event (PFS2), overall survival, patient-reported outcomes and safety.

Why will we perform this study? Patients with advanced breast cancer in which the cancer cells have the receptor for the hormone estrogen and/or progesterone are typically treated with an aromatase inhibitor, a hormone therapy that decreases estrogen being made in the body, together with an inhibitor of cyclin-dependent kinases 4 and 6 (CDK4/6), a drug that blocks the growth of cancer cells. Although cancers usually respond to treatment initially, the cancer cells eventually change, so the drug combination no longer works. For example, mutation of the estrogen receptor (referred to as ESR1m) can stop aromatase inhibitors from working. Camizestrant is an investigational drug that blocks estrogen receptors, including mutated receptors, reducing the growth and spread of cancer. Here we describe the SERENA-6 clinical trial, which is testing camizestrant as a treatment for patients with breast cancer with ESR1m. How will we perform this research? The phase III SERENA-6 trial will use blood tests to monitor if patients with breast cancer develop ESR1m while being treated with an aromatase inhibitor and a CDK4/6 inhibitor. If ESR1m is detected, yet the disease is stable, participants will be randomly assigned to either continue with the same aromatase inhibitor or switch to camizestrant while continuing with the same CDK4/6 inhibitor. The study will assess whether switching to camizestrant prolongs the time before the cancer grows, spreads or worsens. It will also assess the length of time that participants live for versus those who continue with an aromatase inhibitor. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT04964934 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Do you mind if I record?: Perceptions and practice regarding patient requests to record clinic visits in oncology.

BACKGROUND: Audio recordings of oncology clinic discussions can help patients retain and understand information about their disease and treatment decisions. Access to this tool relies on acceptance of recordings by oncologists. This is the first study to evaluate experience and attitudes of oncologists toward patients recording clinic visits. METHODS: Medical, radiation, and surgical oncologists from 5 US cancer centers and community affiliates were surveyed to evaluate clinicians' experience, beliefs, and practices regarding patient-initiated recordings. RESULTS: Among 360 oncologists (69% response rate), virtually all (93%) have experienced patients seeking to record visits. Although 75% are comfortable with recording, 25% are uncomfortable and 56% report concerns ranging from less thorough discussions to legal liability. Most (85%) always agree when patients ask to record, but 15% never or selectively allow recording. Although 51% believe recording is positive for the patient-physician relationship, a sizable minority report that it can lead to less detailed conversations (28%) or avoidance of difficult topics, including prognosis (33%). Views did not vary based on subspecialty, practice setting, or geographic region, but older age and years in practice were associated with more positive views of recording. The majority of clinicians (72%) desire institutional policies to govern guidelines about recordings. CONCLUSIONS: Most oncologists are comfortable with patient requests to record visits, but a sizable minority remain uncomfortable, and access to recording varies solely on physician preference. This difference in care delivery may benefit from institutional policies that promote access while addressing legitimate physician concerns over privacy and appropriate use of recordings.

Outcomes after treatment of breast cancer during pregnancy including taxanes and/or granulocyte colony-stimulating factor use: findings from a multi-institutional retrospective analysis.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines support comparable treatment for women diagnosed with breast cancer during pregnancy (PrBC) and nonpregnant women with limited case-specific modifications to ensure maternal-fetal safety. Experience during pregnancy with modern agents, such as taxanes or granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (GCSF), is limited. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively identified a multi-institutional cohort of PrBC between 1996 and 2020. Propensity score analyses with multiple imputation for missing variables were applied to determine the associations between chemotherapy exposures during pregnancy, with or without taxanes or GCSF, and a compound maternal-fetal outcome including spontaneous preterm birth, preterm premature rupture of membranes, chorioamnionitis, small for gestational age newborns, congenital malformation, or 5-min Apgar score < 7. RESULTS: Among 139 PrBC pregnancies, 82 (59.0%) were exposed to chemotherapy, including 26 (31.7%) to taxane and 18 (22.0%) to GCSF. Chemotherapy use, in general, and inclusion of taxane and/or GCSF, specifically, increased over time. Pregnancies resulting in live singleton births (n = 123) and exposed to chemotherapy were as likely to reach term as those that were not (59.5% vs. 63.6%, respectively, punadjusted = 0.85). Among women treated with chemotherapy, propensity score-matched odds ratios (OR) for the composite maternal-fetal outcome were not significantly increased with taxane (OR 1.24, 95% CI 0.27-5.72) or GCSF (OR 2.11, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.48-9.22) with similar effects in multiple imputation and sensitivity models. CONCLUSION: The judicious increased use of taxane chemotherapy and/or growth factor support during pregnancy was not associated with unfavorable short-term maternal-fetal outcomes. While these findings are reassuring, case numbers remain limited and continued surveillance of these patients and progeny is warranted.

The effects of a clinic-based weight loss program on health-related quality of life and weight maintenance in cancer survivors: A randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: The Healthy Living and Eating After Cancer Trial demonstrated that a clinic-based weight loss program reduced body weight, as compared with a waitlist control group, over 15 weeks. Here we report the impact of the weight loss intervention on health-related quality-of-life outcomes at week 15, and maintenance of weight loss to week 30. METHODS: This trial randomized cancer survivors of solid tumors and hematologic malignancies (breast cancer: 76.7%) to a 15-week group-based weight loss program (n = 30) or a waitlist control group (n = 30). Participants were not blinded to group assignment. Participants completed a variety of health-related quality-of-life outcome measures at baseline and week 15. From week 15 to week 30, participants initially randomized to the weight loss program were followed with no additional intervention, and participants initially randomized to the waitlist control group commenced the weight loss program. RESULTS: Over the 15 weeks, the weight loss program improved physical functioning (6.2 ± 2.9; p = 0.02; d = 0.31) and reduced insomnia symptoms (-17.1 ± 7.4; p = 0.03; d = -0.30) as measured by the EORTC QLQ-C30, and sleep disturbance (-4.9 ± 1.6; p = 0.005; d = -0.40) as measured by PROMIS, compared to waitlist control. After a weight loss of 4.6 ± 3.9 kg, from week 15 to week 30, participants who were initially randomized to the weight loss program maintained their prior weight loss (+0.6 ± 3.5 kg) and participants who were initially randomized to the waitlist control group lost weight (-3.4 ± 2.9 kg; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In cancer survivors with overweight or obesity, a 15-week clinic-based weight loss program improved health-related quality-of-life outcomes and produced sustained weight loss to week 30.

Birthweight and Chemotherapy Exposure in Women Diagnosed with Breast Cancer during Pregnancy.

OBJECTIVE: Breast cancer is one of the most frequently diagnosed cancers in pregnancy and is commonly treated with chemotherapy. To date, studies examining effects of chemotherapy during pregnancy on fetal growth have yielded conflicting results, and most are limited by small sample sizes or are nonspecific with respect to cytotoxic regimen or type of cancer treated. We sought to evaluate the effect of chemotherapy for breast cancer in pregnancy on birthweight and small for gestational age infants. STUDY DESIGN: This is a retrospective cohort study of 74 women diagnosed with pathologically confirmed breast cancer during pregnancy between 1997 and 2018 at one of three academic medical centers, who had a singleton birth with known birthweight. Forty-nine received chemotherapy and 25 did not receive chemotherapy. Linear regression modeling was used to compare birthweight (by gestational age and sex-specific z-score) by chemotherapy exposure. Subanalyses of specific chemotherapy regimen and duration of chemotherapy exposure were also performed. Placental, neonatal, and maternal outcomes were also analyzed by chemotherapy exposure. RESULTS: In the adjusted model, chemotherapy exposure was associated with lower birthweight (Δ z-score = -0.49, p = 0.03), but similar rates of small for gestational age (defined as birthweight <10th percentile for gestational age) infants (8.2 vs. 8.0%, p = 1.0; Fisher's exact test). Each additional week of chemotherapy (Δ z-score = -0.05, p = 0.03) was associated with decreased birthweight, although no association was found with specific chemotherapy regimen. Chemotherapy exposure was associated with lower median placental weight percentile by gestational age (9th vs. 75th, p < 0.05). Secondary maternal outcomes were similar between the group that did and did not receive chemotherapy. CONCLUSION: Chemotherapy for breast cancer in pregnancy in this cohort is associated with lower birthweight but no difference in the rate of small for gestational age infants. KEY POINTS: · Chemotherapy for breast cancer in pregnancy is associated with decreased birthweight but similar rates of small for gestational age infants.. · Birthweight did not differ according to chemotherapy regimen.. · There is no difference in the rate of small for gestational age infants..

Palbociclib with adjuvant endocrine therapy in early breast cancer (PALLAS): interim analysis of a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: Palbociclib added to endocrine therapy improves progression-free survival in hormone-receptor-positive, HER2-negative, metastatic breast cancer. The PALLAS trial aimed to investigate whether the addition of 2 years of palbociclib to adjuvant endocrine therapy improves invasive disease-free survival over endocrine therapy alone in patients with hormone-receptor-positive, HER2-negative, early-stage breast cancer. METHODS: PALLAS is an ongoing multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 study that enrolled patients at 406 cancer centres in 21 countries worldwide with stage II-III histologically confirmed hormone-receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer, within 12 months of initial diagnosis. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score of 0 or 1. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) in permuted blocks of random size (4 or 6), stratified by anatomic stage, previous chemotherapy, age, and geographical region, by use of central telephone-based and web-based interactive response technology, to receive either 2 years of palbociclib (125 mg orally once daily on days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle) with ongoing standard provider or patient-choice adjuvant endocrine therapy (tamoxifen or aromatase inhibitor, with or without concurrent luteinising hormone-releasing hormone agonist), or endocrine therapy alone, without masking. The primary endpoint of the study was invasive disease-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all randomly assigned patients who started palbociclib or endocrine therapy. This report presents results from the second pre-planned interim analysis triggered on Jan 9, 2020, when 67% of the total number of expected invasive disease-free survival events had been observed. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02513394) and EudraCT (2014-005181-30). FINDINGS: Between Sept 1, 2015, and Nov 30, 2018, 5760 patients were randomly assigned to receive palbociclib plus endocrine therapy (n=2883) or endocrine therapy alone (n=2877). At the time of the planned second interim analysis, at a median follow-up of 23·7 months (IQR 16·9-29·2), 170 of 2883 patients assigned to palbociclib plus endocrine therapy and 181 of 2877 assigned to endocrine therapy alone had invasive disease-free survival events. 3-year invasive disease-free survival was 88·2% (95% CI 85·2-90·6) for palbociclib plus endocrine therapy and 88·5% (85·8-90·7) for endocrine therapy alone (hazard ratio 0·93 [95% CI 0·76-1·15]; log-rank p=0·51). As the test statistic comparing invasive disease-free survival between groups crossed the prespecified futility boundary, the independent data monitoring committee recommended discontinuation of palbociclib in patients still receiving palbociclib and endocrine therapy. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (1742 [61·3%] of 2840 patients on palbociclib and endocrine therapy vs 11 [0·3%] of 2903 on endocrine therapy alone), leucopenia (857 [30·2%] vs three [0·1%]), and fatigue (60 [2·1%] vs ten [0·3%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 351 (12·4%) of 2840 patients on palbociclib plus endocrine therapy versus 220 (7·6%) of 2903 patients on endocrine therapy alone. There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: At the planned second interim analysis, addition of 2 years of adjuvant palbociclib to adjuvant endocrine therapy did not improve invasive disease-free survival compared with adjuvant endocrine therapy alone. On the basis of these findings, this regimen cannot be recommended in the adjuvant setting. Long-term follow-up of the PALLAS population and correlative studies are ongoing. FUNDING: Pfizer.

A dynamic portrait of adverse events for breast cancer patients: results from a phase II clinical trial of eribulin in advanced HER2-negative breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Adverse events (AE) during oncology clinical trials are typically reported using the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), which provides information about the frequency and severity of AEs from the provider's perspective. Instruments that track patient-reported outcomes (PRO) complement the CTCAE and provide additional patient-centered information about the toxicity profile of an anti-cancer drug. METHODS: We conducted a single-arm, open-label phase II study of eribulin as first- or second-line therapy for metastatic hormone receptor-positive/HER2-negative (HR+/HER2-) or triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). Patients were recruited simultaneously into each cohort by tumor subtype. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included evaluation of toxicity by CTCAE and PRO instruments and agreement between CTCAE and PRO. The study also investigated single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with treatment-induced neurotoxicity. RESULTS: 83 patients were enrolled: 45 into the HR+/HER2- cohort and 38 into the TNBC cohort. The ORR was 35.6% (90% CI 24-39%) in the HR+/HER2- cohort and 13.2% (90% CI 5-26%) in the TNBC cohort. Stable disease as the best response was recorded in 55.1% of patients with HR+/HER2- disease and 60.5% with TNBC. Toxicity analysis revealed a discordance between CTCAE and PRO assessment in many patients, with a focus on fatigue, alopecia, and neuropathy. Pharmacogenomic analysis identified SNPs associated with treatment-induced peripheral neuropathy. CONCLUSIONS: Eribulin is active in HER2- breast cancer. This study reveals that provider-assessed AEs can vary greatly from patient experiences. Future studies should incorporate CTCAE and PRO instruments to improve reporting of treatment-related AEs. ClinicalTrials.gov Registration: NCT01827787.

Multidisciplinary Recommendations Regarding Post-Vaccine Adenopathy and Radiologic Imaging: Radiology Scientific Expert Panel.

Vaccination-associated adenopathy is a frequent imaging finding after administration of COVID-19 vaccines that may lead to a diagnostic conundrum in patients with manifest or suspected cancer, in whom it may be indistinguishable from malignant nodal involvement. To help the medical community address this concern in the absence of studies and evidence-based guidelines, this special report offers recommendations developed by a multidisciplinary panel of experts from three of the leading tertiary care cancer centers in the United States. According to these recommendations, some routine imaging examinations, such as those for screening, should be scheduled before or at least 6 weeks after the final vaccination dose to allow for any reactive adenopathy to resolve. However, there should be no delay of other clinically indicated imaging (eg, for acute symptoms, short-interval treatment monitoring, urgent treatment planning or complications) due to prior vaccination. The vaccine should be administered on the side contralateral to the primary or suspected cancer, and both doses should be administered in the same arm. Vaccination information-date(s) administered, injection site(s), laterality, and type of vaccine-should be included in every preimaging patient questionnaire, and this information should be made readily available to interpreting radiologists. Clear and effective communication between patients, radiologists, referring physician teams, and the general public should be considered of the highest priority when managing adenopathy in the setting of COVID-19 vaccination.

Olaparib and α-specific PI3K inhibitor alpelisib for patients with epithelial ovarian cancer: a dose-escalation and dose-expansion phase 1b trial.

BACKGROUND: Based on preclinical work, we found that combination of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors with drugs that inhibit the homologous recombination repair (HRR) pathway (such as PI3K inhibitors) might sensitise HRR-proficient epithelial ovarian cancers to PARP inhibitors. We aimed to assess the safety and identify the recommended phase 2 dose of the PARP inhibitor olaparib in combination with the PI3K inhibitor alpelisib in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer and in patients with breast cancer. METHODS: In this multicentre, open-label, phase 1b trial following a 3 + 3 dose-escalation design, we recruited patients aged 18 years or older with the following key eligibility criteria: confirmed diagnosis of either recurrent ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer of high-grade serous histology; confirmed diagnosis of either recurrent ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer of any histology with known germline BRCA mutations; confirmed diagnosis of recurrent breast cancer of triple-negative histology; or confirmed diagnosis of recurrent breast cancer of any histology with known germline BRCA mutations. Additional patients with epithelial ovarian cancer were enrolled in a dose-expansion cohort. Four dose levels were planned: the starting dose level of alpelisib 250 mg once a day plus olaparib 100 mg twice a day (dose level 0); alpelisib 250 mg once a day plus olaparib 200 mg twice a day (dose level 1); alpelisib 300 mg once a day plus olaparib 200 mg twice a day (dose level 2); and alpelisib 200 mg once a day plus olaparib 200 mg twice a day (dose level 3). Both drugs were administered orally, in tablet formulation. The primary objective was to identify the maximum tolerated dose and the recommended phase 2 dose of the combination of alpelisib and olaparib for patients with epithelial ovarian cancer and patients with breast cancer. Analyses included all patients who received at least one dose of the study drugs. The trial is active, but closed to enrolment; follow-up for patients who completed treatment is ongoing. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01623349. FINDINGS: Between Oct 3, 2014, and Dec 21, 2016, we enrolled 34 patients (28 in the dose-escalation cohort and six in the dose-expansion cohort); two in the dose-escalation cohort were ineligible at the day of scheduled study initiation. Maximum tolerated dose and recommended phase 2 dose were identified as alpelisib 200 mg once a day plus olaparib 200 mg twice a day (dose level 3). Considering all dose levels, the most common treatment-related grade 3-4 adverse events were hyperglycaemia (five [16%] of 32 patients), nausea (three [9%]), and increased alanine aminotransferase concentrations (three [9%]). No treatment-related deaths occurred. Dose-limiting toxic effects included hyperglycaemia and fever with decreased neutrophil count. Of the 28 patients with epithelial ovarian cancer, ten (36%) achieved a partial response and 14 (50%) had stable disease according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.1. INTERPRETATION: Combining alpelisib and olaparib is feasible with no unexpected toxic effects. The observed activity provides preliminary clinical evidence of synergism between olaparib and alpelisib, particularly in epithelial ovarian cancer, and warrants further investigation. FUNDING: Ovarian Cancer Dream Team (Stand Up To Cancer, Ovarian Cancer Research Alliance, National Ovarian Cancer Coalition), Breast Cancer Research Foundation, Novartis.

Contemporary management of breast cancer during pregnancy and subsequent lactation in a multicenter cohort of young women with breast cancer.

The incidence of breast cancer diagnosed during pregnancy is increasing. We sought to characterize patient, treatment, pregnancy and lactation factors among young women with newly diagnosed breast cancer during pregnancy in a prospective cohort study. We identified all women who were pregnant when diagnosed with invasive breast cancer among those enrolled in the Young Women's Breast Cancer Study (NCT01468246), and collected details on pregnancy, birth and lactation from surveys, and treatment information medical record review. Of 1302 enrolled participants, 976 women with invasive breast cancer completed full baseline surveys, among whom 39 (4.0%) patients reported being pregnant at diagnosis. Median age at diagnosis was 34 years (range: 25-40), with stage distribution: I, 28%; II, 44%; III, 23%; and IV, 5%. 74% of patients (29/39) had grade 3 tumors, 59% (23/39) ER-positive, and 31% (12/39) HER2-positive disease. 23 (59%) had surgery during pregnancy, 4 (17%) during the first trimester. Among the women who had surgery during pregnancy, 61% (14/23) underwent lumpectomy, 35% (8/23) unilateral, and 4% (1/23) bilateral mastectomy. All patients who had chemotherapy (51%, 20/39) received it in second and third trimesters, and had ACx4. There were 31 live births, 2 spontaneous, and 5 therapeutic abortions. Among live births, 16 (41%) were before 37 weeks of gestation. Three women reported breastfeeding. Within 6 months after delivery, comprehensive staging in 13 patients showed upstaging in four patients. In a contemporary cohort of young women with breast cancer, pregnancy at diagnosis is relatively uncommon. Treatment during pregnancy can generally be consistent with standard surgical and chemotherapy approaches, with attention to timing of therapies. Longer-term outcomes including effects of some timing issues including delayed use of anti-HER2 therapy on patient outcomes warrant further research.

Tamoxifen Directly Inhibits Platelet Angiogenic Potential and Platelet-Mediated Metastasis.

OBJECTIVE: Platelets, which are mainly known for their role in hemostasis, are now known to play a crucial role in metastasis. Tamoxifen is a selective estrogen receptor modulator that is widely used for the treatment of breast cancer. Tamoxifen and its metabolites have been shown to directly impact platelet function, suggesting that this drug has additional mechanisms of action. The purpose of this study was to determine whether tamoxifen exerts antitumor effects through direct platelet inhibition. APPROACH AND RESULTS: This study found that pretreatment with tamoxifen leads to a significant inhibition of platelet activation. Platelets exposed to tamoxifen released significantly lower amounts of proangiogenic regulator vascular endothelial growth factor. In vitro angiogenesis assays confirmed that tamoxifen pretreatment led to diminished capillary tube formation and decreased endothelial migration. Tamoxifen and its metabolite, 4-hydroxytamoxifen, also significantly inhibited the ability of platelets to promote metastasis in vitro. Using a membrane-based array, we identified several proteins associated with angiogenesis metastasis that were lower in activated releasate from tamoxifen-treated platelets, including angiogenin, chemokine (C-X-C motif) ligand 1, chemokine (C-C motif) ligand 5, epidermal growth factor, chemokine (C-X-C motif) ligand 5, platelet-derived growth factor dimeric isoform BB, whereas antiangiogenic angiopoietin-1 was elevated. Platelets isolated from patients on tamoxifen maintenance therapy were also found to have decreased activation responses, diminished vascular endothelial growth factor release, and lower angiogenic and metastatic potential. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate that tamoxifen and its metabolite 4-hydroxytamoxifen directly alter platelet function leading to decreased angiogenic and metastatic potential. Furthermore, this study supports the idea of utilizing targeted platelet therapies to inhibit the platelet's role in angiogenesis and malignancy.